Re: Architecture all
Raul Miller <email@example.com> writes:
> > How is bar relevant to a user of platform X, if bar can't be
> > installed by dselect or dpkg -i?
> Um.. why can't bar be installed by dpkg -i (or even by dselect,
> using appropriate overrides key sequences)?
Because bar depends on foo and foo couldn't exist for platform X. (In
joeyh's example and that's what I was talking about, not quake-lib)
> As for quake-lib,
Again, I wasn't talking about quake-lib, it recommends _not_ depends
on an architecture specific package. I have no problem with
> > [ This hypothetical example assumes an m68k user ]
> > foo 2.3-5 (Arch: all) depends on svgalib. svgalib will probably
> > never be compiled for m68k, so this package can never be
> > installed, but yet it's being offered to the user in dselect.
> never say never. In particular, the ggi project would indeed allow
> svgalib to be compiled for m68k (admittedly, I don't think it will
> be releasable by the end of this year).
Blah, I said probably never. But anyway, I don't think this is
justification for allowing uninstallable packages to be presented to
the end-user. Sure this *may* change at some unspecified point in the
future, and at that point the maintainer of foo would have to change
the Architecture: field. But this is a) only going to happen once,
and b) might happen in well over a year from now and c) might never
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to firstname.lastname@example.org .